Critical Elections: British Parties and Voters in Long-Term Perspective
Publication Year: 1999
Did Labour's landslide victory in 1997 mark a critical watershed in British party politics? Did the radical break with 18 years of Conservative rule reflect a fundamental change in the social and ideological basis of British voting behaviour? Critical Elections brings together leading scholars of parties, elections and voting behaviour to provide the first systematic overview of long-term change in British electoral politics.
- Front Matter
- Back Matter
- Subject Index
Part I: New Patterns of Party Competition?
- Chapter 1: Party Policy and Ideology: Reversing the 1950s?
- Chapter 2: New Politicians? Changes in Party Competition at Westminster
- Chapter 3: Party Members and Ideological Change
- Chapter 4: Party Loyalties: Dealignment or Realignment?
Part II: New Social Alignments?
- Chapter 5: Class: Labour as a Catch-All Party?
- Chapter 6: Race: Towards a Multicultural Electorate?
- Chapter 7: Region: New Labour, New Geography?
- Chapter 8: Gender: A Gender-Generation Gap?
- Chapter 9: New Sources of Abstention?
Part III: New Issue Alignments?
Editorial selection. Introduction and Conclusion © Pippa Norris and Geoffrey Evans 1999
Chapter 1 © Ian Budge 1999
Chapter 2 © Pippa Norris 1999
Chapter 3 © Paul Webb and David M. Farrell 1999
Chapter 4 © Ivor Crewe and Katarina Thomson 1999
Chapter 5 © Geoffrey Evans, Anthony Heath and Clive Payne 1999
Chapter 6 © Shamit Saggar and Anthony Heath 1999
Chapter 7 © John Curtice and Alison Park 1999
Chapter 8 © Pippa Norris 1999
Chapter 9 © Anthony Heath and Bridget Taylor 1999
Chapter 10 © David Sanders 1999
Chapter 11 © Geoffrey Evans 1999
Chapter 12 © Paula Surridge, Alice Brown, David McCrone and Lindsay Paterson 1999
Chapter 13 © Mark Franklin and Christina Hughes 1999
First published 1999
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system. transmitted or utilised in any form or by any means. electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise. without permission in writing from the Publishers.
SAGE Publications Ltd
6 Bonhill Street
London EC2A 4PU
SAGE Publications Inc.
2455 Teller Road
Thousand Oaks, California 91320
SAGE Publications India Pvt Ltd
32, M-Block Market
New Delhi 110 048
British Cataloguing in Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
ISBN 0-7619-6020-1 (pbk)
Library of Congress catalog card number available
Typeset by Anneset, Weston-super-Mare, Somerset
Printed and bound in Great Britain by Athenaeum Press, Gateshead
List of Figures[Page vii]
- 1.1 UK vote, 1945–97: the ‘Butler swing’ xxi
- 1.2 Seats won at UK general elections, 1900–97 xxv
- 1.3 Analytical typology of elections xxvii
- 1.1 British parties’ ideological movement on a left-right scale, 1945–97 5
- 1.2 German parties’ ideological movement on a left-right scale, 1949–94 8
- 1.3 US parties’ ideological movement on a left-right scale, 1952–96 9
- 1.4 Party programmatic emphasis on ‘Europe’: positive, 1945–97 14
- 1.5 Party programmatic emphasis on ‘Europe’: negative, 1945–97 14
- 1.6 Party programmatic emphasis on decentralization, 1945–97 15
- 1.7 Party programmatic emphasis on minority groups (women, ethnic), 1945–97 16
- 1.8 Party programmatic emphasis on capitalist economics, 1945–97 16
- 1.9 Party programmatic emphasis on state intervention, 1945–97 17
- 1.10 Party programmatic emphasis on social conservatism, 1945–97 17
- 1.11 Party programmatic emphasis on social services expansion, 1945–97 18
- 1.12 Party programmatic emphasis on quality of life, 1945–97 19
- 2.1 Left-right ideological position of politicians and voters, 1997 32
- 2.2 Actual position of politicians and voters on the major issues 33
- 3.1 Attitudes towards nationalization and privatization, 1964–97 49
- 4.1 Strength of identification, 1964–97 71
- 5.1 UNIDIFF parameters by election 93
- 5.2 Scaled UNIDIFF parameter and fitted service/working-class Con/Lab odds ratio by election 94
- 5.3 Scaled UNIDIFF parameter and Con-Lab ideology scale difference by election 95
- 5.4 Scaled UNIDIFF parameter and negated Labour ideology score (‘left-wingness’) by election 95
- 5.5 Con-Lab ideology scale difference and scaled voter view of Con-Lab difference by election 98
- [Page viii]8.1 The British gender gap, 1964–97 152
- 8.2 Women Conservatives by birth cohort 157
- 9.1 Turnout, 1945–97 166
- 10.1 Voters’ position and perception of the major parties on ideological scales, 1992 and 1997 198
- 11.1 Attitudes towards membership of the European Union, 1964–97 211
- 11.2 EU attitudes by vote, 1964–97 212
- 11.3 Attitudes by class, 1964–97 214
- 12.1 Party shares of the vote in Scotland, 1945–97 226
- 13.1 The issue space of the British electorate in 1983, represented in two dimensions defined by factor loadings 243
- 13.2 Movement of the supporters of various parties and leaders within the issue space, 1974–83 245
- 13.3 The issue space of the British electorate in 1997, represented in two dimensions defined by factor loadings 246
- 13.4 Movement of party leaders within the issue space, 1987–97 247
- 14.1 Government (Con-Lab) lead: monthly Gallup polls 1945–99 262
List of Tables[Page ix]
- I.1 The change in UK seats, 1992–97 xx
- I.2 The share of the UK vote, 1992–97 xxiv
- 1.1 Major policy areas in election manifestos, 1945–97 3
- 1.2 The left-right coding scale 5
- 1.3 ‘Top ten’ issues for major British parties, 1997 10
- 1.4 ‘Top ten’ issues for major British parties, 1945–83 11
- 1.5 Combination of full policy-coding categories into 20 groupings 13
- 2.1 Labour MPs’ support for socialist-laissez faire values, 1992–97 27
- 2.2 Labour MPs’ attitudes towards policy issues, 1992–97 29
- 2.3 Labour MPs’ support for libertarian-authoritarian values, 1992–97 30
- 2.4 MPs’ support for constitutional reform, 1992–97 31
- 2.5 Ideological change among politicians, 1992–97 31
- 2.6a Actual position of politicians and voters on the issue scales, 1997 35
- 2.6b How politicians saw voters, 1997 36
- 2.6c How voters saw politicians, 1997 37
- 2.7 Turnover in the House of Commons, 1929–97 39
- 2.8 Left-right position of politicians by age, 1997 40
- 2.9 Position of politicians on jobs v. prices by age, 1997 41
- 2.10 Age and cohort effects on value scales: all 1997 MPs 41
- 3.1 British party membership, 1964–97 48
- 3.2 Major party members’ attitudes on nationalization, 1964–97 50
- 3.3a Party members’ attitudes, 1974–97: socialism-laissez faire indicators 51
- 3.3b Party members’ attitudes, 1974–97: liberty-authority indicators 52
- 3.4 Attitudinal change and polarization among major party members, 1974–97 53
- 3.5 The attitudinal cohesion of party members, 1974–97 54
- 3.6 The extremism of party members, 1974–97 56
- 3.7 Ideological disparities between party members and voters, 1974–97 58
- 3.A Factor analyses 62
- 3.B Cronbach alpha reliability coefficients for scales 62
- 4.1 Characteristics of ‘deviating’ and ‘critical’ elections 66
- [Page x]4.2 Trends in party identification, 1964–97 67
- 4.3 Non-Labour identifiers at first election who switched to Labour vote at second election, 1964–97 68
- 4.4 Party identification, 1964–97 69
- 4.5 Change in the Conservative and Labour share of the vote and party identification, 1966–97 70
- 4.6 Age and cohort analyses of mean partisan strength, 1966–97 72
- 4.7 Age and cohort analyses of mean partisan strength: Labour identifiers, 1966–97 74
- 4.8 Conservative partisan identification and vote defection, 1964–97 75
- 4.9 Strength of Labour partisan identification, 1964–97 76
- 4.10 Changes in feelings towards Conservative and Labour parties 77
- 4.11 Negative, positive and polarized partisanship, 1987–97 78
- 4.12 Party difference index among vote switchers, 1964–97 79
- 5.1 Class by party vote for British elections, 1964–97 90
- 5.2 Basic models for class by party by election, 1964–97 91
- 5.3 UNIDIFF parameters and odds ratios for British elections, 1964–97 92
- 5.4 Log-multiplicative models for class by party by election 96
- 5.5 Perceptions of party difference, 1964–97 97
- 6.1 Citizenship by ethnic group, 1997 105
- 6.2 Electoral registration by ethnic group, 1997 107
- 6.3 Turnout by ethnic group, 1997 107
- 6.4 Party vote among ethnic minorities, 1974–92 109
- 6.5 Asian and black vote distribution, 1997 110
- 6.6 Vote distribution by ethnic group, 1997 111
- 6.7 Ethnic minority group source of parties’ vote, 1997 112
- 6.8 Ethnicity, social class and Labour voting, 1997 114
- 6.9 Logistic multilevel model of Labour voting, 1997 116
- 7.1 Long-term regional variation in swing 126
- 7.2 Regional differences in each class 127
- 7.3 Subjective economic perceptions by region, 1997 129
- 7.4 Political attitudes by region, 1987 132
- 7.5 Perception of Labour's position by region, 1997 133
- 7.6 Labour's image by region, 1997 135
- 7.7 Perception of Conservatives’ position by region, 1997 136
- 7.8 Conservatives’ image by region, 1997 136
- 7.9a Logistic regression of Labour v. Conservative voting by social structure 138
- 7.9b Logistic regression of Labour v. Conservative voting by social structure and party image 139
- 7.10 Tactical voting, 1992–97 141
- [Page xi]7.11 Perceived position of Liberals/Liberal Democrats, 1974–97 144
- 8.1 Vote by gender, 1945–97 152
- 8.2 Reported turnout by gender, 1964–97 153
- 8.3 Gender gap by age group, 1964–97 156
- 8.4 Logistic regression models of the Conservative vote, 1997 158
- 8.5 Logistic regression models of Con-Lab vote by generation and gender, 1997 160
- 9.1 Turnout, 1945–97 165
- 9.2 Official and reported turnout, 1964–97 168
- 9.3 Flow of the vote, 1992–97 170
- 9.4 Class and turnout, 1992–97 172
- 9.5 Economic activity and turnout, 1992–97 174
- 9.6 Trade union membership and turnout, 1992–97 174
- 9.7 Logistic regression of turnout on socio-psychological variables, 1997 175
- 9.8 Changes in distribution of socio-psychological factors, 1964–97 176
- 9.9 The changing electoral context, 1964–97 178
- 10.1 Distribution of the ideological ‘centre-ground’ vote by party, 1992–97 183
- 10.2 Attitudes towards nationalization, privatization, big business and trades union power, 1964, 1992 and 1997 186
- 10.3 Marginal distributions of the core analytic variables, 1964–97 191
- 10.4 The effects of ideology on Conservative voting, 1964–97 193
- 10.5 The effects of ideology on Labour voting, 1964–97 194
- 10.6 The effects of ideology on Conservative and Labour voting, 1964–97 195
- 10.7 The effects of ideology on Conservative and Labour voting, 1979–97 196
- 10.8 Distance of the average respondent from the major parties, 1992 and 1997 198
- 10.9 The effects on Conservative and Labour voting of respondents’ ideological closeness to the Conservative party, 1992–97 200
- 10A.1 Effects of position on ideology scales on voting, 1992 and 1997 205
- 10A.2 The effects of ideology on Liberal (Democrat) voting, 1964–97 206
- 11.1 Correlations between attitudes towards the European Union and other issues, 1974–97 215
- 11.2 The effects of attitudes on Labour-Conservative voting, 1974–97 216
- [Page xii]11.3 Logistic regressions of 1997 vote on left-right, libertarian-authoritarian and EU attitudes, controlling for 1992 vote 218
- 11.4 The impact of party realignment on Europe on levels of class voting, 1974–97 219
- 12.1 National identity and constitutional preferences in Scotland, 1997 228
- 12.2 Constitutional preferences in Scotland, 1974–97 229
- 12.3 Perceived positions of parties on constitutional reform 230
- 12.4 Constitutional preferences by vote, 1974–97 231
- 12.5 Logistic regression models of support for independence and change in the constitution 233
- 12.6 Logistic regression models of vote at 1997 general election 234
- 12.7 Logistic regression models of party identity, autumn 1997 236
- 13.1 Changes in the percentage of voters in each quadrant, 1992–97 249
- 13.2 Total effects of class and issues on Conservative voting, 1987–97 250
- 14.1 Indicators of net electoral volatility 261
- A.1 BES response rate 275
- A.2 Ethnic minority study screening: response 277
- A.3 BES survey weighting 279
- A.4 Ethnic minority survey weighting 279
- A.5 BRS sample of British MPs and parliamentary candidates 281
In common with most large-scale projects this book has incurred many debts – mintellectual, administrative and financial – upon the way. The British Election Study 1997 was conducted by the Centre for Research into Elections and Social Trends (CREST). CREST is an ESRC Research Centre linking Social and Community Planning Research (SCPR) and Nuffield College, Oxford, in conjunction with Pippa Norris (Harvard University). The 1997 British Election Cross-section Survey was funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC Grant Number H552/255/003) and the Gatsby Charitable Foundation, one of the Sainsbury Family Charitable Trusts. The survey was directed by Anthony Heath, Roger Jowell, John Curtice and Pippa Norris and it would not have been possible without the help of Geoffrey Evans and Bridget Taylor at Nuffield College, Katarina Thomson, Lindsay Brook and Alison Park at SCPR, and Ann Mair at Strathclyde University. The book also draws on the 1997 Ethnic Minority Survey conducted by CREST with Shamit Saggar (Queen Mary and Westfield College, London) with funding from the ESRC (R000 222 123) and the Commission for Racial Equality. Similarly chapters utilize the 1997 Scottish Election Study conducted by CREST in collaboration with David McCrone (University of Edinburgh) and colleagues, funded by the ESRC (H552/225/004), and the British Representation Study 1997, conducted by Pippa Norris and colleagues, administered by the University of East Anglia, and funded by the Nuffield Foundation. We would also like to thank all the fieldwork interviewers and all the respondents who co-operated with the 1997 survey, and indeed to all the directors of the series of BES studies, one of the longest continuous series of post-election studies available anywhere in the world. Details about the BES series, and in particular the related studies carried out in 1997, are provided in the Technical Appendix.
We would also like to acknowledge the assistance of Mandy Roberts at Nuffield College with preparation of the final manuscript and support from colleagues at the Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy, Kennedy School of Government. This book is a companion volume to three closely related studies focusing on different aspects of electoral change: On Message: Communicating the Campaign by Pippa Norris, John Curtice, David Sanders, Margaret Scammell and Holli Semetko (London: Sage, 1999), The Scottish Electorate by Alice Brown, David McCrone, Lindsay Paterson and Paula Surridge (London: Macmillan, 1998) and New Labour and the Future of the Left by Anthony [Page xiv]Heath et al. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, forthcoming).
Lastly our intellectual debts are many and varied. We would particularly like to acknowledge the support of Jean Blondel, the members of ESRC's Election Study Management Advisory Committee (ESMAC) and all colleagues involved in the consultative process for the design of the 1997 BES. We greatly appreciated the stimulus and critical advice we received from colleagues who attended the book conference in May 1997, the generous hospitality of the Warden and Fellows of Nuffield College, Oxford, and the financial support of Sage Publications. As well as the contributors, the conference included Ron Amman (ESRC), Ole Borre (Aarhus University), David Butler (Exeter College, Oxford), Bruno Cautres (Maison Francaise), Sir David Cox (Nuffield College, Oxford), Stephen Fisher (Nuffield College, Oxford), Ron Johnston (University of Bristol), Richard Johnston (University of British Columbia), Peter Kellner (The Observer/Evening Standard), Anthony King (University of Essex), Peter Lynn (SCPR/CREST), Iain McLean (Nuffield College, Oxford), Nelson Polsby (University of California, Berkeley), Byron Shafer (Nuffield College, Oxford), Stephen Struthers (ESRC), Marc Swyngedouw (Leuven), Dafydd Trystan (University of Wales, Aberystwyth), Alan Ware (Worcester College, Oxford) and Richard Wyn Jones (University of Wales, Aberystwyth). We greatly benefited from all the comments and feedback generated by colleagues at the meeting. Lastly the book is dedicated to two remarkable colleagues without whom the BES series would not have existed. Donald E. Stokes pioneered the behavioural study of voting and elections in the USA and, with David Butler, initiated and maintained the BES surveys from 1963 to 1970. Bo Särlvik inherited this mantle, along with colleagues at Essex University, when the BES transferred there for the three general elections from 1974 to 1979. This book is a memorial to their legacy.
Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, and Nuffield College, Oxford.
Notes on Contributors[Page xv]
Alice Brown is Professor of Politics at the University of Edinburgh. Her research interests include Scottish politics, women and politics and economic policy. She is co-author with David McCrone and Lindsay Paterson of Politics and Society in Scotland (1998) and co-author with David McCrone, Lindsay Paterson and Paula Surridge of The Scottish Electorate (1998). She is Co-Director with David McCrone of the Governance of Scotland Forum at the University of Edinburgh; and a member of the Scottish Office cross-party consultative steering group which will report to the Secretary of State for Scotland on the standing orders and procedures for the new Scottish Parliament.
Ian Budge is Professor of Politics at the University of Essex. His books include Voting and Party Competition (1977) [with Dennis Farlie]; Ideology Strategy and Party Change (1987) [co-edited with David Robertson and Derek Hearl]; Parties, Policies and Democracy (1994) [with Hans-Dieter Klingemann and Richard Hofferbert]; and The New British Politics (1998) [with Ivor Crewe, David McKay and Ken Newton].
Ivor Crewe is Vice Chancellor and Professor of Government at the University of Essex. He was Co-Director of the British Election Study programme from 1973 to 1981. Recent publications include The British Electorate 1963–1992 (1995) [with Anthony Fox and Neil Day]; SDP: The Birth, Life and Death of the Social Democratic Party 1981–1987 (1995) [with Anthony King]; The New British Politics (1998) [with Ian Budge, David McKay and Kenneth Newton]; and Political Communications: Why Labour Won the 1997 Election (1998) [co-edited with John Bartle and Brian Gosschalk]. His current research interests are the impact of party leader images on the vote and the politics of higher education in Britain.
John Curtice is Deputy Director of CREST, and Professor of Politics and Director of the Social Statistics Laboratory at the University of Strathclyde. His publications include How Britain Votes (1985, with Anthony Heath and Roger Jowell); Understanding Political Change (1991, with Anthony Heath and others); Labour's Last Chance? (1994, co-edited) and On Message (1999, with Pippa Norris and others). He has been a co-editor of SCPR's British Social Attitudes series since 1994 and is a regular consultant and commentator on electoral matters for the media.
[Page xvi]Geoffrey Evans is Faculty Fellow, Nuffield College. He has been a member of the British Election Studies team since 1987 and is a consultant with CREST. He is the author of many articles on electoral behaviour, political sociology and democratization. Other publications include Understanding Political Change (1991, with CREST colleagues) and The End of Class Politics? (forthcoming). He is currently completing The Formation of Political Cleavages in Post-Communist Democracies (with Stephen Whitefield; forthcoming).
David M. Farrell is Senior Jean Monnet Lecturer in European Politics at the University of Manchester. Co-editor of Party Politics, his recent books include Comparing Electoral Systems (1998) and Party Discipline and Parliamentary Government (co-editor, 1999). Dr Farrell has published widely on parties, campaigning and electoral systems.
Mark Franklin is the John R. Reitemeyer Professor of Political Science at Trinity College, Hartford, Connecticut. He was previously Moores Professor at the University of Houston after having spent 20 years at the University of Strathclyde. He is the author of The Decline of Class Voting in Britain (1985) and co-author of Electoral Change (1992). His recent publications include Choosing Europe? The European Electorate and National Politics in the Face of Union (1996) [with Cees van der Eijk and others] and articles about voting in European elections, referendum votes and turnout in national elections around the world.
Anthony Heath is Professor of Sociology at the University of Oxford, Official Fellow of Nuffield College, Oxford, and Co-Director of CREST. His publications include How Britain Votes (1985, with Roger Jowell and John Curtice); Understanding Political Change (1991, with CREST colleagues); and Labour's Last Chance, (1994, co-edited), along with recent articles in journals such as the American Journal of Sociology, the British Journal of Political Science and the Journal of the Royal Statistical Society.
Christina Hughes is a doctoral candidate at the University of Houston. Her main areas of interest are comparative voting behaviour and comparative parties. She plans to write her dissertation about the effects of social cross-pressures on voting behavior using a cross-national analysis in order to control for institutional effects.
David McCrone is Professor of Sociology, and Convener of the Unit for the Study of Government in Scotland. He is also Co-Director, with Alice Brown, of the University of Edinburgh's Governance of Scotland Forum. Recent books include The Scottish Electorate (1998); The Sociology of Nationalism (1998); Politics and Society in Scotland (1998) [with Alice Brown and Lindsay Paterson]; Scotland – the Brand: The Making of Scottish Heritage (1995); and Understanding Scotland: The Sociology of a [Page xvii]Stateless Nation (1992). He is Co-Director of the ESRC-funded Scottish Election Study 1997. David McCrone is a member of the expert panel on procedures and standing orders for the Scottish Parliament.
Pippa Norris is Associate Director (Research) at the Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy at the Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University. Recent books include On Message (1999, with John Curtice, David Sanders, Margaret Scammell and Holli Semetko); Critical Citizens (1999); Elections and Voting Behaviour (1998); Britain Votes 1997 (1997); and Electoral Change Since 1945 (1997). She was Co-Director of the 1997 British Election Study and co-edits The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics.
Alison Park is a Research Director at Social and Community Planning Research and a co-editor of the British Social Attitudes Report series. She worked on the 1997 British Election Study and the 1997 Scottish and Welsh Referendum Studies. Recent publications include ‘Thatcher's children?’ in the 14th British Social Attitudes Report (1997, with Anthony Heath); ‘Teenagers and their politics’ (1995) in the 12th British Social Attitudes Report; and Young People, Politics and Citizenship: A Disengaged Generation (1998, with Roger Jowell).
Lindsay Paterson is Professor of Educational Policy at Edinburgh University. He has published on many aspects of Scottish politics and the sociology of education. His books include A Diverse Assembly: The Debate on a Scottish Parliament (1998) and The Autonomy of Modern Scotland (1994). He is Vice-Convener of the Unit for the Study of Government in Scotland, and edits its quarterly journal, Scottish Affairs.
Clive Payne is Director of the Computing and Research Support Unit, Social Studies Faculty, University of Oxford and a Fellow of Nuffield College, Oxford. He has published widely on statistical modelling in sociology, politics and social policy. He has been a consultant to the BBC on election-night forecasting since 1969. He is co-editor of Statistics in Society, a journal of the Royal Statistical Society.
Shamit Saggar is Senior Lecturer in Government at Queen Mary and Westfield College. His books include Race and Public Policy (1991); Race and Politics in Britain (1992); Race and British Electoral Politics (1998); and Race and Representation (forthcoming). Dr Saggar was the Director of the 1997 British Ethnic Minority Election Study. He is currently preparing a major intellectual history of racial politics in Britain and the USA.
David Sanders is Professor of Government and Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Research) at the University of Essex. He has recently published articles [Page xviii]on electoral forecasting and outcomes in Political Studies, Electoral Studies, Political Quarterly, Parliamentary Affairs and numerous edited volumes. He is co-editor of the British Journal of Political Science. He is co-author of On Message (1999 with Pippa Norris, John Curtice, Margaret Scammell and Holli Semetko).
Paula Surridge is Lecturer in Sociology at the University of Salford. She is currently Co-Director of the 1997 Scottish Election Study and was research assistant on the 1992 study. Her research interests are in political behaviour and stratification. Recent publications include The Scottish Electorate (1998) [with Alice Brown, David McCrone and Lindsay Paterson] and, with David McCrone, ‘National pride’ in Roger Jowell et al. (eds.) British and European Social Attitudes: How Britain Differs.
Bridget Taylor is a Research Officer in CREST at Nuffield College, Oxford. Her publications include Scotland and Wales: Nations Again? (1999 co-edited with Katarina Thompson), Understanding Change in Social Attitudes (1996, co-edited with Katarina Thomson) and Labour's Last Chance? (1994, co-edited with CREST colleagues).
Katarina Thomson is a Research Director at Social and Community Planning Research and a co-editor of the British Social Attitudes Report series. She worked on the 1997 British Election Study and the 1997 Scottish and Welsh Referendum Studies. Recent publications include ‘Portraying sex: the limits of tolerance’ (1996) and ‘How we view violence’ (1997) [both with Steven Barnett] in the 13th and 14th British Social Attitudes Reports, and Understanding Change in Social Attitudes (1996, co-edited with Bridget Taylor).
Paul Webb is a Senior Lecturer in Government at Brunei University and a former Visiting Fellow in Social Sciences at Curtin University in Western Australia. The review editor of Party Politics, he is the author of Trade Unions and the British Electorate (1992) as well as numerous articles and chapters on British and European parties. He is currently writing a book on British political parties for Sage Publications and editing a comparative volume on parties in democratic societies for Oxford University Press.
Technical Appendix[Page 272]Introduction
The British General Election Surveys (BES) constitute the longest series of academic surveys in Britain. They have taken place immediately after every general election since 1964, giving a total of 11 to date. In addition to these post-election cross-section surveys, panel surveys (in which respondents to the previous election survey were reinterviewed at the subsequent election) have been conducted between every pair of elections except 1979 and 1983. The 1992–97 Parliament was covered by the first British Election Panel Study (BEPS) in which the panel was interviewed on eight occasions starting as the 1992 BES post-election cross-section survey and concluding with a wave following the 1997 general election. A second British Election Panel Study follows from the 1997 post-election cross-section survey and the panel is planned to be interviewed on approximately eight occasions, again with the concluding wave immediately following the next general election. There have also been two non-election year surveys (in 1963 and 1969); a postal referendum study in 1975; additional or booster Scottish studies in 1974, 1979, 1992 and 1997; an additional Welsh study in 1979; a Northern Ireland election study in 1992; campaign studies in Britain in 1987, 1992 and 1996–97; a booster sample of ethnic minority members in 1997; a qualitative study in 1997; Scottish (two) and Welsh referendum studies in 1997; and a Northern Ireland referendum and election study in 1998.
The data sets arising from these surveys, together with questionnaires and technical documentation, have been deposited at the ESRC Data Archive at the University of Essex. Summary information about the 1963–87 surveys, and further references, are provided in an Appendix to Understanding Political Change (Heath et al. 1991), and for the 1992 surveys in the Appendix to Labour's Last Chance? (Heath et al. 1994b).
The series was originated by David Butler (Nuffield College Oxford) and Donald Stokes (University of Michigan) in 1963, who also conducted the 1964, 1966 and 1970 surveys. The series then passed to Bo Särlvik and Ivor Crewe (University of Essex) who conducted the February and October 1974 surveys, joined by David Robertson for the 1979 survey. The [Page 273]1983, 1987, 1992 and 1997 surveys have been directed by Anthony Heath (Jesus then Nuffield College Oxford), Roger Jowell (Social and Community Planning Research – SCPR – London) and John Curtice (University of Liverpool then Strathclyde); in 1997 these directors were joined by Pippa Norris (Harvard University). The associated 1997 Scottish Election Study was conducted in collaboration with David McCrone (University of Edinburgh) and colleagues, and the 1997 Ethnic Minority Survey with Shamit Saggar (Queen Mary and Westfield College, London) – see below. The British Election Panel Studies and the 1997–98 Scottish, Welsh and Northern Ireland surveys were conducted by the Centre for Research into Elections and Social Trends (CREST), a research centre funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) and based jointly at SCPR and Nuffield College Oxford, directed by Anthony Heath and Roger Jowell, with John Curtice.
The principal component of the British Election Study time series of surveys is the post-election cross-section survey. All the BES surveys have been based on probability samples representative of the electorate (in 1997, the resident adult population) of Great Britain (south of the Caledonian Canal, except in 1992 and 1997). Northern Ireland has always been excluded from the British Election Study. All the post-election cross-section surveys have been conducted by face-to-face interview. They have been noted for the high quality of their fieldwork and the richness of their data, especially that on the respondents’ social and occupational characteristics.The 1997 British Election Study Cross-Section Survey
The 1997 British Post-election Cross-section survey was funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) (grant no. H552/255/003) and the Gatsby Charitable Foundation, one of the Sainsbury Family Charitable Trusts, which again allowed its core funding of SCPR's British Social Attitudes survey series to be devoted to the BES series in election year. This Appendix also provides information about the Scottish Election Study (SES) and Ethnic Minority Study (EMS), additional components of the 1997 cross-section survey (see below). More detailed information about the cross-section survey design and fieldwork, including the SES and EMS, is presented in The 1997 British Election Studies: Technical Report (Thomson et al. 1998); both the full questionnaires and a comprehensive code book are available from the ESRC Data Archive at the University of Essex, as are the data files. Information is also available at http://www.strath.ac.uk/Other/CREST.
The BES survey was designed to yield a representative sample of the population resident in private households in Britain aged 18 or over. Previous election studies have used the electoral register as the sampling frame. Evidence suggests that the coverage of the electoral register has [Page 274]declined over the last decade or so, and consequently the chances of bias in its coverage have increased. Concern about these inadequacies as well as substantive interest in the characteristics of people who are not registered but would be eligible to vote if they were registered, lead to the decision to change the sampling frame. The sample of addresses was drawn from the Postcode Address File (Lynn and Taylor 1995). In order to maintain the comparability of the BES time series, the presence or absence of each respondent on the electoral register was subsequently checked (see below).
Sampling from the Postcode Address File involves a multi-stage design. First, any postal sectors with fewer than 500 delivery points (DPs) were grouped with another. The list of (grouped) sectors was then stratified on the basis of subregion (32 for England/Wales and five for Scotland), population density and SEG profile (percentage of household heads who are employer/managers). Some 218 postal sectors were selected with probability proportional to DP count: 164 in England and Wales, 54 in Scotland. Thirty DPs were sampled systematically from throughout each sector, giving 6,540 issued addresses: 4,920 in England and Wales and 1,620 in Scotland.
At each issued address, the interviewer established the number of occupied dwelling units (DUs) and, where there were several, selected one DU at random for interview (using a Kish grid and random numbers generated separately for each serial number). At each (selected) DU the interviewer established the number of adults aged 18+ normally resident there, and selected one adult at random (using the same procedure as for selecting a DU). The unequal selection probabilities arising from these procedures, and the oversampling of Scotland, are taken into account by the weighting (see below).
Two small-scale pretests of questions were carried out in October and December 1996. The pilot interviewers were personally debriefed by the research team.
The survey, conducted by SCPR interviewers, consisted of a face-to-face interview and a self-completion supplement. The face-to-face interview was administered in 1997 for the first time using a lap-top computer. The use of computer-assisted personal interviewing or CAPI was introduced following methodological work by SCPR which established that the change should not introduce significant mode effects (Martin et al. 1993). This enabled the use of more complex filtering and question selection routines in 1997 than had hitherto usually been used. The face-to-face interview lasted on average 62 minutes (66 minutes in Scotland). The self-completion supplement, either collected by the interviewer or returned by post, was completed by 86% of respondents. The self-completion supplement was first introduced on the 1987 election study, and has been used at each study since then; it substantially increases the number of questions which can be asked.
All interviewers working on the main fieldwork phase were personally [Page 275]briefed by members of the SCPR BES research team. In all, 222 interviewers worked on the survey (170 in England and Wales, and 52 in Scotland). Fieldwork for the survey began on 2 May; 74% was complete by the end of May, and 96% by the end of June; the remainder was completed by 1 August – mainly recalls on respondents who were unable or unwilling to be interviewed earlier.
The names of some potential respondents who had been difficult to find at home, or had moved, or had refused, or had broken appointments, were reissued to interviewers (in most cases interviewers who had not made the initial calls) during the later phase of fieldwork.The Scottish Election Study
The linked Scottish Election Study (SES) was funded by a separate ESRC grant (no. H552/255/004) to David McCrone, Alice Brown (University of Edinburgh), Paula Surridge (University of Aberdeen) and Katarina Thomson (SCPR). The SES consisted of, first, an over-sample in Scotland [Page 276]on the BES post-election cross-section survey in order to enable more detailed investigation of voting behaviour in Scotland, including analyses comparing subgroups within Scotland; and, secondly, approximately 40 extra questions with special reference to Scotland asked only of Scottish respondents.TABLE A.1 BES response rate
With the booster sample, 882 productive interviews were achieved in Scotland, instead of the 270 or so Scottish interviews we would expect without sampling extra addresses. Thus whereas Scotland represents approximately 9% of the population of Great Britain, Scottish respondents make up 24% of the sample. The weighting scheme (see below) down-weights the Scottish over-sample to form a representative British sample.The Ethnic Minority Study
The BES Ethnic Minority Study was conducted by CREST in collaboration with Shamit Saggar (Queen Mary and Westfield College, London). The ethnic minority extension was funded by the ESRC (grant no. R000/222/123) and the Commission for Racial Equality. The study consisted of a booster sample of ethnic minority members and approximately 40 extra questions as part of the face-to-face interview asked only of ethnic minority respondents (respondents who were part of the samples generated from the screening exercises – see below – were correspondingly given a shortened version of the self-completion questionnaire, omitting the CSES questions – see below). This was the first ethnic minority booster sample to the BES series, its purpose being to enable more detailed investigation of voting behaviour and political attitudes among ethnic minority members. The ethnic minority sample covered England and Wales only. The survey definition for eligible ethnic minority members was ‘black or of Indian, Pakistani or Bangladeshi origin’. Other ethnic minorities were excluded from the booster sample as there would be insufficient numbers for separate analysis. The sample was generated from three sources:
- Ethnic minority respondents who happened to be generated by the main BES sample (106 cases).
- A large-scale screening exercise in areas of high ethnic minority concentration (430 cases).
- Next-door screening at some sample points with high ethnic minority concentrations. (The screening was carried out at the two addresses immediately to the left and the two addresses immediately to the right of the original household.) (194 cases).
The unequal selection probabilities arising from the three sample types are taken into account in the weighting. Table A.2 (below) shows the response rate of the two screening exercises.[Page 277]TABLE A.2 Ethnic minority study screening: responseQuestionnaire Design
For the first time on the BES, the research team engaged in a formal consultation exercise with members of the BES user community – an extension of the customary informal consultation procedure. This was conducted in conjunction with the Election Studies Management and Advisory Committee (ESMAC) set up by the series’ principal funder, the ESRC. Members of the research team distinguished ‘core’ from ‘non-core’ survey items. BES users were invited to submit a case for the inclusion of questions or groups of questions, and these were evaluated by subject working groups comprising both members of the research team and members of the user community. A conference of invited users was held under the auspices of ESMAC on 4 June 1996, and the draft questionnaire was discussed at a session of the 1996 annual conference of the Elections, [Page 278]Public Opinion and Parties (EPOP) subgroup of the Political Studies Association (held in Sheffield 13–15 September 1996).
The survey carried a split-half experiment on the administration of the customary question about respondents’ income. This question is conventionally asked in the BES using a show card on which appear income bands each denoted by a letter, and the respondent is asked to tell the interviewer the letter corresponding to his or her income. Refusal to answer the income question in the 1992 BES survey was found to be a strong predictor of drop-out from the British Election Panel Study (Taylor et al. 1996). In order to investigate the effect on response and subsequent panel attrition of different methods of administering the income question, a random half of the sample was administered the question in the conventional way; the other half was given a ballot form, asked to indicate their income band then to put the form in an envelope, seal it and return it to the interviewer. Variables are included on the data set for each version of the question separately and for the combined data.
The self-completion questionnaire included a module of around 30 questions on the subject of attitudes towards democratic institutions and processes (see the documentation of the questionnaires) administered as part of the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (CSES) programme. Around 30 countries are to administer a similar module on their respective national election study between 1996 and 1999, to enable cross-national comparisons to be made.Validation of Turnout and Registration
As in 1987 and 1992, respondents’ reports of turnout at the 1997 election were checked against the official records (Swaddle and Heath 1989). The marked-up Electoral Register held at the Lord Chancellor's Office for a year after the general election shows which electors voted, or were issued with postal votes, and is available for public inspection. Corresponding information for respondents in Scotland was obtained from the Sherriffs’ Clerks. Supplementary checks of registration (but not turnout) were carried out on ordinary (that is, not marked-up) registers at the Office of National Statistics offices in Titchfield in July 1998.
Because the 1997 BES used the PAF as its sampling frame, rather than the Electoral Register as in previous surveys in the series, the full sample includes some people who were not on the electoral register and thus not entitled to vote. In order to make the 1997 BES fully comparable to earlier surveys, a check was carried out against the Electoral Register on whether the respondent was on the register or not.1 For comparability with earlier BES surveys, the 1997 data can be weighted to exclude non-registered respondents. Analyses reported in this volume were carried out on data weighted in this way. Figures reported on in this volume use data based on the initial validation study; results from the supplementary registration study are included in the final data file.[Page 279]Weighting
A weighting scheme has been devised to take account of differential selection probabilities (see Table A.3). In particular, the weights take account of two factors: 1) the Scottish over-sample and 2) unequal selection probabilities at the household level. (In brief, the PAF sample generated addresses with equal probability. However, since only one person was interviewed at each address, people in small households had a larger selection probability than people in large households.) The weights also use information about non-responding addresses to counterbalance the effect of non-response biases. The weights have been scaled to reflect the downweighting on the Scottish boost (hence the weighted sample size is radically smaller than the unweighted sample size). A separate file with Scottish cases only is also provided.
Additional weights take account of the outcome of the Electoral Register checks to generate a sample of registered electors.
Some members of the 1997 BES sample of course happen to be members of ethnic minorities; these cases are integral to the British cross-section survey. A separate ethnic minority file includes both these ethnic minority respondents from the cross-section sample and those sampled through the additional screening exercises. The ethnic minority file has its own weights which additionally take account of the differing selection probabilities of respondents from the different sample types (see Table A.4).Geographic Information
The addresses of all respondents to the 1997 survey have been post-coded. Certain geographic information has been added to the survey data, such as constituency and ward name and number, and local authority identifiers.TABLE A.3 BES survey weightingTABLE A.4 Ethnic minority survey weighting[Page 280]The British Representation Study 1997
The linked British Representation Study 1997 (BRS-97) involved a national survey of prospective parliamentary candidates and MPs from all major parties standing in the 1997 British general election. This is the second survey, following a similar study in 1992 (Norris and Lovenduski 1995). A battery of attitudinal items on the BRS was designed to be identical to those in the BES facilitating mass-elite comparisons.
The research project was conducted under the direction of Pippa Norris (Harvard University) in collaboration with Joni Lovenduski (Southampton University), Anthony Heath (Nuffield College/CREST), Roger Jowell (Social and Community Planning Research/CREST) and John Curtice (Strathclyde University/CREST). The research was distributed and administered from the School of Economic and Social Studies at the University of East Anglia and funded by the Nuffield Foundation.
The mail survey was sent to all parliamentary candidates selected by the main British parties (Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat, SNP, Plaid Cymru, and Green) by 1 June 1996. The Labour and Conservative parties had chosen about 600 candidates at this stage, although other parties had selected fewer. The first wave of the survey was sent out, with an official covering letter from each party, from 18 June to 3 July 1996. A post-card reminder was sent out two weeks later, followed by a third wave with a complete questionnaire and reminder letter in mid to late July. In total 1,628 questionnaires were sent out and we received 999 replies, representing a response rate of 61.4%. The survey includes 178 incumbent British MPs and 821 other parliamentary candidates. In addition, we received 122 refusals (7.5%), usually from MPs who noted that as a matter of policy they never responded to any surveys. The response rate was evenly balanced between parties so that the survey reflects the composition of the 1997 House of Commons (see Table A.5). For more details see: http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/people/pnorris/data.htmValue and Issue Scales
Many chapters use value scales designed to measure socialist-laissez-faire and libertarian-authoritarian values (see, for example, Tables 2.1 and 2.3), and also responses to six issue questions measured on 11-point scales.
The socialist-laissez-faire value scale included the following six items with a 5-point agree/disagree response scale:
TABLE A.5 BRS sample of British MPs and parliamentary candidates
- Ordinary people get their fair share of the nation's wealth.
- There is one law for the rich and one for the poor.
- There is no need for strong trade unions to protect employees’ working conditions and wages.
- It is government's responsibility to provide a job for everyone who wants one.
- [Page 281]Private enterprise is the best way to solve Britain's economic problems.
- Major public services and industries ought to be in state ownership.
The libertarian-authoritarian value scale included the following six agree/disagree items:
- Young people today don't have enough respect for traditional British values.
- Censorship of films and magazines is necessary to uphold moral standards.
- People in Britain should be more tolerant of those who lead unconventional lives.
- Homosexual relations are always wrong.
- People should be allowed to organize public meetings to protest against the government.
- Even political parties which wish to overthrow democracy should not be banned.
These items were also used in the 1992 British Candidate Study and the 1997 British Representation Study.
The following six issue questions were asked about with an 11-point response scale, on which respondents were asked to place themselves and then each of the parties in turn (including in Scotland, the SNP).Jobs v. Prices Scale
Some people feel that getting people back to work should be the government's top priority. These people would put themselves in box 1. Other people feel that keeping prices down should be the government's top priority. These people would put themselves in box 11. Other people have views in-between: ‘Using the following scales … where would you place your view?’[Page 282]Taxation and Spending Scale
Some people feel that government should put up taxes a lot and spend much more on health and social services (1). These people would put themselves in box 1. Other people feel that government should cut taxes a lot and spend much less on health and social services. These people would put themselves in box 11. Other people have views in-between: Using the following scale … Where would you place your view?Privatization and Nationalization Scale
Some people feel that government should nationalize many more private companies. These people would put themselves in box 1. Other people feel that government should sell off many more nationalized industries. These people would put themselves in box 11. Other people have views somewhere in-between: Using the following scale … Where would you place your view?Redistribution Scale
Some people feel that government should make much greater efforts to make people's incomes more equal. These people would put themselves in Box A. Other people feel that government should be much less concerned about how equal people's incomes are. These people would put themselves in Box K. And other people have views somewhere in-between. Using the following scale … Where would you place your view?EU Scale
Some people feel Britain should do all it can to unite fully with the European Union. These people would put themselves in box 1. Other people feel that Britain should do all it can to protect its independence from the European Union. These people would put themselves in box 11. Other people have views somewhere in-between: Using the following scale … Where would you place your view?Women's Rights Scale
Recently there has been discussion about women's rights. Some people feel that women should have an equal role with men in running business, industry and government. These people would put themselves in box 1. Other people feel that a woman's role is in the home. These people would put themselves in box 11. Other people have views somewhere in-between. Using the following scale … Where would you place your view?
In addition, the survey included the 11-point left-right scale, on which respondents were asked to place themselves and then each of the parties in turn (including in Scotland, the SNP, and in Wales, Plaid Cymru).[Page 283]Left-Right Scale
In politics people sometimes talk of left and right: Using the following scale, where 1 means left and 11 means right, where would you place yourself …?Note
1. In order to make the check as complete as possible, the survey collected not only the ‘issued address’, but also asked the respondent 1) whether there was another address where he or she thought he or she was on the register and 2) where he or she had been living in October 1996 (the qualifying date for the 1997 registers). Thus in some cases up to three addresses were checked.
References[Page 284]1983. The Jewish Community in British Politics.Oxford: Clarendon Press..1993. ‘Rational choice and turnout.’American Journal of Political Science37: 246-78. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/21115311995. Why Parties?Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.1963. Party and Society: The Anglo-American Democracies.Westport, CT: Greenwood Press..1993. Race and Representation: Ethnic Minorities and the 1992 Elections.London: Commission for Racial Equality.and .1995. ‘Voter choice in 1992: economics, issues and anger.’American Journal of Political Science, 39: 714-44. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2111651and .1979. The Creation of a Democratic Majority, 1928-36.Chicago, IL: University of Chicago, Press..1996. After Suffrage.Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press..1997. Safety First: The Making of New Labour.London: Granta Books.and .1996. Race and Elections.London: Routledge..1997. ‘Blair – one year on’ (http://www.mori.com/pubinfo/blairone.htm).and .1993. ‘Conservative splits and European integration.’Political Quarterly, 62: 420-35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/poqu.1993.64.issue-4, and .1989. ‘The south Asian presence in British electoral politics.’New Community, 15 (4): 537-48..1977. ‘The Sikhs: the development of south Asian settlements in Britain.’ In Between Two Cultures: Migrants and Minorities in Britain, ed. J. L.Watson. Oxford: Blackwell.and1998. ‘Electoral continuity and change, 1868-1996.’Electoral Studies, 17 (3): 301-326. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0261-3794%2898%2900035-31997. ‘Political awareness and heterogeneity in models of voting: some evidence from the British election studies.’ In British Elections and Parties Yearbook, 1997, ed. DavidDenver. London: Frank Cass..1990. Identity, Competition and Electoral Availability 1885-1985.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.and .1979. ‘The electoral cycle in American politics.’British Journal of Political Science, 9: 129-56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0007123400001691..1981. ‘Kippers, kittens and kipper boxes: Conservative populists and race relations.’Political Quarterly, 52: 342-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/poqu.1981.52.issue-3and .1962. The End of Ideology: On the Exhaustion of Political Ideas in the Fifties.New York: Free Press..1998. ‘Europe, Thatcherism and traditionalism: opinion, rebellion and the Maastricht Treaty in the backbench Conservative Party, 1992-94.’ In Britain in the Nineties: The Politics of Paradox, ed. HughBerrington. London: Frank Cass.and . [Page 285]1995. Let Us Face the Future.London: Fabian Society..1970. Voters, Parties and Leaders.London: Penguin..1994. ‘Social constituency and ideological profile: Scottish nationalism in the 1990s.’Political Studies, 42: 616-29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/post.1994.42.issue-4and .1998. The Scottish Electorate.London: Macmillan, , and .1997. ‘Party identification, political preferences and material conditions: evidence from the British Household Panel Survey, 1991-92.’Party Politics, 3: 53-77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1354068897003001003and .1994. ‘A new spatial theory of party competition.’British Journal of Political Science, 24: 443-67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0007123400006955.Budge, Ian, IvorCrewe and DennisFarlie. Eds. 1976. Party Identification and Beyond.New York: Wiley.1977. Voting and Party Competition.London: Wiley.and .Budge, Ian, DavidRobertson and DerekHearl. Eds. 1987. Ideology, Strategy and Party Change: Spatial Analyses of Post-War Election Programmes in 19 Democracies.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO97805115587711970. Critical Elections and the Mainspring of American Politics.New York: Transaction Books..1975. ‘American politics in the 1970s: beyond party?’. In The Future of Political Parties, eds. LouisMaisel and Paul M.Sacks. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage..1951. The Electoral System in Britain.Oxford: Clarendon Press..1992. The British General Election of 1992.Basingstoke: Macmillan. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/9780230372092and .1997. The British General Election of 1997.Basingstoke: Macmillan.and .1965. The British General Election of 1964.London: Macmillan.and .1960. The British General Election of 1959.London: Macmillan.and .1974. Political Change in Britain: the Evolution of Electoral Choice.and .2nd edn.London: Macmillan.1960. The American Voter.New York: Wiley., , and .1966. Elections and the Political Order.New York: Wiley, , and .1989. Issue Evolution: Race and the Transformation of American Politics.Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.and .1997. Were You Still Up for Portillo?London: Penguin..1987. Sex Differences in Political ParticipationNew York: Praeger..1996. Hope and Glory: Britain 1900-1990.London: Allen Lane/The Penguin Press..Clubb, Jerome and HowardAllen. Eds. 1971. Electoral Change and Stability in American Political History.New York: Free Press.1990. Partisan Realignment: Voters, Parties, and Government in American History.Boulder, CO: Westview Press., and .1994. ‘Feminists and the gender gap.’ In Different Roles, Different Voices: Women and Politics in the United States and Europe, eds. MarianneGithens, PippaNorris and JoniLovenduski. New York: HarperCollins..1997. Fresh Future.London: Conservative Party.. [Page 286]1975. The Age of Alignment: Electoral Politics in Britain 1922-1929.London: Macmillan..1993. A Short History of the Liberal Party, 1900-92.London: Macmillan..1991. ‘Feminism and the gender gap: a second look.’Journal of Politics, 53: 1111-22. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2131869and .1996. ‘Blair's bastards: discontent within the parliamentary Labour Party.’Centre for Legislative Studies.and .1998. ‘And this is how it's been for us’.New Statesman, 1 May: 25..1975. Participation of Ethnic Minorities in the General Election of October 1974.London: Community Relations Commission..1980. Votes and Policies.London: Commission for Racial Equality..1984. Ethnic Minorities and the 1983 General Election.London: Commission for Racial Equality..1981. ‘Why the Conservatives won.’ In Britain at the Polls 1979, ed. HowardPenniman. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute..1983. ‘Representation and ethnic minorities in Britain’. In Ethnic Pluralism and Public Policy, eds. KenYoung and NathanGlazer. London: Heinemann..1985. ‘Great Britain.’ In Electoral Change in Western Democracies, eds. IvorCrewe and DavidDenver. London: Croom Helm..1986. ‘On the death and resurrection of class voting: some comments on how Britain votes.’Political Studies, 35: 620-38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/post.1986.34.issue-4.1987. ‘A new class of politics?’Guardian, 15 June..1992. ‘Changing votes and unchanging voters.’Electoral Studies, 11: 335-45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0261-3794%2892%2990005-Q.1996. ‘1979-1997’. In How Tory Governments Fall, ed. AnthonySeldon. London: HarperCollins..1997. ‘By-elections since 1983: did they matter?’ In By-elections in British Politics, eds. ChrisCook and JohnRamsden. London: UCL Press..1977a. ‘Non-voting in British general elections.’ In British Political Sociology Yearbook 3, ed. ColinCrouch. London: Croom Helm., and .1995. The British Electorate, 1963-1992., and .2nd edn.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Crewe, Ivor, BrianGosschalk and JohnBartle. Eds. 1998. Political Communications: Why Labour Won the General Election of 1997.London: Frank Cass.1995. SDP: The Birth, Life and Death of the Social Democratic Party.Oxford: Oxford University Press.and .1977b. ‘Partisan dealignment in Britain 1964-74.’British Journal of Political Science, 7: 129-90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0007123400000922, and .1988. ‘Ideological change in the British Conservative Party.’American Political Science Review, 82 (2): 361-84. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1957391and .1988. ‘Mrs Thatcher's crusade: conservatism in Britain, 1972-1986.’ In The Resurgence of Conservatism in Anglo-American Democracies, eds. B.Cooper, A.Kornberg and W.Mishler. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.and .1988. ‘One nation?’ In British Social Attitudes: The 5th Report, eds. RogerJowell, SharonWitherspoon and LindsayBrook. Aldershot: Gower..1996. ‘One nation again?’ In British Social Attitudes; the 13th Report, eds. RogerJowell, JohnCurtice, AlisonPark, LindsayBrook and KatarinaThomson. Aldershot: Dartmouth..1997. ‘Anatomy of a non-landslide.’Politics Review, 7 (1): 2-8.. [Page 287]1995. ‘The sceptical electorate.’ In British Social Attitudes, the 12th Report, eds. RogerJowellet al.Aldershot: Dartmouth.and .1997. Trust in the political system.’ In British Social Attitudes: the 14th Report, eds. RogerJowellet al.Aldershot: Ashgate.and .1982. ‘Electoral choice and the production of government: the changing operation of the electoral system in the United Kingdom since 1955.’British Journal of Political Science, 12 (3): 249-98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0007123400002970and .1986. ‘Proportionality and exaggeration in the British electoral system.’Electoral Studies, 5 (3): 209-28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0261-3794%2886%2990012-0and .1992. ‘Appendix 2: the results analysed.’ In The British General Election of 1992, David Butler and Dennis Kavanagh. London: Macmillanand .1997. ‘Appendix 2: the results analysed.’ In The British General Election of 1997, DavidButler and DennisKavanagh. Basingstoke: Macmillan.and .1998. ‘Neither Representative Nor Accountable: First Past the Post in Britain.’ Paper presented at the Annual Workshops of the European Consortium for Political Research, University of Warwick.and .1974. ‘The nature of Pakistani ethnicity in industrial cities in Britain.’ In Urban Ethnicity, ed. A.Cohen. London: Tavistock.1994. The Green Rainbow.New Haven, CT: Yale University Press..1996. Citizen Politics: Public Opinion and Political Parties in Advanced Industrial Democracies..2nd edn.Chatham, NJ: Chatham House Publishers.1935. The Strange Death of Liberal England.New York: H. Smith & R. Hass..1974. ‘Marginality and turnout in British general elections.’British Journal of Political Science, 4: 17-35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0007123400009340and .1985. ‘Marginality and turnout in British general elections in the 1970s.’British Journal of Political Science, 15: 381-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0007123400004245and .1992. ‘Constituency campaigning.’Parliamentary Affairs, 45: 528-44.and .1997a. Turnout.’ In Britain Votes, 1997, eds. PippaNorris and NeilGavin. Oxford: Oxford University Press.and .1997b. Modern Constituency Electioneering.London: Frank Cass.and .1989. ‘The changing politics of women: gender and political alignments in 11 nations.’European Journal of Political Research, 17: 241-62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ejpr.1989.17.issue-3and .1987. Prime Minister: The Conduct of Policy under Harold Wilson and James Callaghan.London: Jonathan Cape..1989. Multi-Party Britain.London: Macmillan.1985. British Democracy at the Crossroads.London: Allen & Unwin.and .1997. ‘The electoral system.’ In Britain Votes 1997, eds. PippaNorris and NeilGavin. Oxford: Oxford University Press.and .1949. Political Opinion.London.1969. ‘Voting behaviour in Britain 1945-1966.’ In Studies in British Politics, ed. RichardRose. London: Macmillan..1954. Political Parties.Paris: Colin..1955. The Political Role of Women.Paris: UNESCO..1998. High Time or High Tide for Labour Women? Fabian Pamphlet 585. London: Fabian Society.and .1993. ‘Europeans and the European Community: the dynamics of public support for European integration.’International Organization, 47: 507-34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300028083and . [Page 288]‘The education effect.’Oxford Review of Education.and . Forthcoming.1967. Political Parties in Western Democracies.New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books..1992. ‘Individual or family? Results from two approaches to class assignments.’Acta Sociologica, 35: 95-106. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/000169939203500202and .1996. From Salisbury to Major.Manchester: Manchester University Press.and .1994. ‘Tactical voting and Labour's prospects.’ In Labour's Last Chance? The 1992 Election and Beyond, eds. AnthonyHeath, RogerJowell and JohnCurtice with BridgetTaylor. Aldershot: Dartmouth..1995. ‘The state of The Union: attitudes towards Europe.’ In British Social Attitudes: the 12th Report, eds. RogerJowell, JohnCurtice, AlisonPark and LindsayBrook. Aldershot: Dartmouth..1998a. ‘How Britain views the EU.’ In British – and European -Social Attitudes, the 15th Report, eds. RogerJowell, JohnCurtice, AlisonPark, LindsayBrook, KatarinaThomson and CarolineBryson. Aldershot: Ashgate..1998b. ‘Euroscepticism and Conservative electoral support: how an asset became a liability.’British Journal of Political Science, 28: 573-90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0007123498000258.Evans, Geoffrey. Ed. 1999a. The End of Class Politics? Class Voting in Comparative Context.Oxford: Oxford University Press.1999b. ‘Economics and politics revisited: explaining the decline in Conservative support, 1992-95.’Political Studies47 (1): 139-51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/post.1999.47.issue-1.1998. ‘New Labour, new tactical voting?’ In British Elections and Parties Review 8, eds. DavidDenver, JustinFisher, PhillipCowley and CharlesPattie. London: Frank Cass., and .1995. ‘The measurement of left-right and libertarian-authoritarian values: comparing balanced and unbalanced scales.’Quality and Quantity, 29: 19-206. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01101898and .1996a. ‘Measuring left-right and libertarian-authoritarian values in the British electorate.’British Journal of Sociology, 47: 93-112. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/591118, and .1991. ‘Modelling the class/party relationship 1964-87’, Electoral Studies, 10: 99-117. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0261-3794%2891%2990042-Q, and .1996b. ‘Class and party revisited: a new model for estimating changes in levels of class voting.’ In British Elections and Parties Yearbook, 1995, eds. ColinRailings, DavidFarrell, DavidDenver and DavidBroughton. London: Frank Cass., and .1996. ‘Campaign strategies and tactics’. In Comparing Democracies: Elections and Voting in Global Perspective, eds. LawrenceLeDuc, Richard G.Niemi and PippaNorris. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.1997. Regional Dynamics: The Basis of Electoral Support in Britain.London: Frank Cass..1998. ‘Why the Conservatives lost.’ In Political Communications: Why Labour Won the General Election of 1997, eds. IvorCrewe, BrianGosschalk and JohnBartle. London: Frank Cass..1998. ‘LLAMA: an object-oriented system for log multiplicative models.’ In COMPSTAT 98, Proceedings in Computational Statistics, eds. RogerPayne and PeterGreen. Heidelberg: Physica-Verlag..1994. ‘British political parties and public attitudes towards the European Community: leading, following or getting out of the way?’ In British Elections and Parties Yearbook 1994, eds. DavidBroughton, DavidFarrell, DavidDenver and ColinRailings. London: Frank Cass..1985. The Decline of Class Voting in Britain: Changes in the Basis of Electoral Choice, 1964-1983.Oxford: Clarendon Press.. [Page 289]1995. ‘The undoing of Winston Churchill: mobilization and conversion in the 1945 realignment of British voters.’British Journal of Political Science, 25 (4): 429-52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0007123400007304and .et al.1992. Electoral Change: Responses to Evolving Social and Attitudinal Structures in Western Countries.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press., , ,1994. ‘Uncorking the bottle: popular opposition to European unification in the wake of Maastricht.’Journal of Common Market Studies, 32: 455-72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5965.1994.tb00509.x, and .1997. ‘The responsive public: issue salience, policy change, and preferences for European unification.’Journal of Theoretical Politics, 9: 347-63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0951692897009003005and .1992. The End of History and the Last Man.Harmondsworth: Penguin..1988. The Free Economy and the Strong State.Basingstoke: Macmillan Education..1996. ‘The legacy of Thatcherism.’ In The Blair Agenda, ed. M.Perryman. London: Lawrence & Wishart..1993. British Political Parties Today.Manchester: Manchester University Press.and .Geddes, Andrew and JonathanTonge. Eds. 1997. Labour's Landslide.Manchester: University of Manchester Press.1992. ‘The European Community.’ In The Changing Labour Party, eds. MichaelSmith and JimSpear. London: Routledge.and .1998. The Third Way.Oxford: Polity..1995. Multilevel Statistical Models.London: Edward Arnold.1996. ‘Class and politics in advanced industrial societies.’ In Conflicts about Class: Debating Inequality in Late Industrialism, eds. DavidLee and BryanTurner. London: Longman..1999. ‘Modelling the pattern of class voting in British elections, 1964-92.’ In The End of Class Politics? Class Voting in Comparative Context, ed. GeoffreyEvans. Oxford: Oxford University Press..1992. Revised Class Schema 1992’. JUSST Working Paper No. 13. Oxford: Nuffield College and SCPR.and .1968. The Affluent Worker: Political Attitudes and Behaviour.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press., , and .1984. ‘Women: if not apolitical, then Conservative.’ In Women and the Public Sphere, eds. JanetSiltanen and MichelleStanworth. London: Hutchinson.and .1986. The New Enlightenment: The Rebirth of Liberalism.London: Macmillan.and .Guardian, The.1996. ‘The campaign will urge black people to use their vote.’ 2 December.1979. Seats, Votes and the Spatial Organisation of Elections.London: Pion.and .1959. Elections and Party Management: Politics in the Time of Disraeli and Gladstone.London: Longman.1989. Can Labour Win?London: Unwin Hyman.and .1997. ‘Gender, feminism and electoral behaviour in Britain.’Electoral Studies, 16 (2): 203-16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0261-3794%2897%2900012-71997. ‘Gender, party leaders and election outcomes in Australia, Britain and the United States.’Comparative Political [Page 290] Studies, 30: 3-26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0010414097030001001and .1998. ‘New Labour, New Voters?’ Paper presented at the annual conference of the PSA, April.and .1988. ‘Working class conservatives and middle class socialists.’ In British Social Attitudes: The 1988 Report, eds. RogerJowell, SharonWitherspoon and LindsayBrook. Aldershot: Gower.and .1994a. ‘The measurement of core beliefs and values: the development of balanced socialist/laissez faire and libertarian/authoritarian scales.’British Journal of Political Science, 24: 115-31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0007123400006815, and .1995a. ‘Modelling the class-party relationship in Britain, 1964-92’.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, 158: 563-74. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2983446, , and .1994. ‘The impact of Labour's policy review.’ In Labour's Last Chance? The 1992 Election and Beyond, eds. AnthonyHeath, RogerJowell and JohnCurtice with BridgetTaylor. Aldershot: Dartmouth.and .1985. How Britain Votes.Oxford: Pergamon Press., and .1990. ‘The rise of a new political agenda?’European Sociological Review, 6: 31-49., , and .1991. Understanding Political Change: The British Voter 1964-1987.Oxford: Pergamon., , , , and .Heath, Anthony, RogerJowell and JohnCurtice with BridgetTaylor. Eds. 1994b. Labour's Last Chance? The 1992 Election and Beyond.Aldershot: Dartmouth.1995b. ‘The 1994 European and Local Elections: Abstention, Protest and Conversion.’ Paper presented at the annual conference of the PSA, April., , and .1988. ‘The demise of party identification theory.’Electoral Studies7: 95-107. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0261-3794%2888%2990025-Xand .1992. ‘Changes in values.’ In British Social Attitudes: The 9th Report, eds. RogerJowell, LindsayBrook and BridgetTaylor. Aldershot: Dartmouth/SCPR.and .1997. ‘Education and occupational attainments: the impact of ethnic origins.’ In Ethnicity in the 1991 Census, Volume 4, ed. ValerieKarn. London: HMSO.and .1992. ‘It was party identification all along: question order effects on reports of party identification in Britain.’Electoral Studies, 11: 93-105. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0261-3794%2892%2990032-2and .1999. ‘British national sentiment.’British Journal of Political Science, 29: 155-75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0007123499000071, , and .et al. Forthcoming. New Labour and the Future of the Left.Oxford: Oxford University Press.,1992. Defeat From the Jaws of Victory.London: Verso.and .1987. Women's Votes: The Keys to Winning. Fabian Pamphlet. London: Fabian Society.and .1994. ‘Britain's dominant-party system.’ In Britain's Changing Party System, eds. LyntonRobbins, HilaryBlackmore and RobertPyper. Leicester: Leicester University Press..1994. ‘Party identification compared across the Atlantic.’ In Elections at Home and Abroad: Essays in Honor of Warren E. Miller, eds. M. KentJennings and Thomas E.Mann. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press..1989. Conservative Capitalism.London: Routledge.and . [Page 291]1977. The Silent Revolution: Changing Values and Political Styles Among Western Publics.Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press..1990. Culture Shift in Advanced Industrial Society.Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press..1997a. Modernization and Postmodernization: Cultural, Economic and Political Change in 43 Societies.Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press..1997b. ‘Changing Gender Gaps.’ Paper presented at the conference on Representation and European Citizenship, Rome..1998. ‘The Global Gender-Generation Gap.’ Paper for the American Political Science Association annual meeting, Boston, MA.and .1991. ‘The evolution of public attitudes towards European integration: 1970-86.’ In Eurobarometer: The dynamics of European Public Opinion, eds. Karl-HeinzReif and RonaldInglehart. London: Macmillan., and .1997. Voter Turnout from 1945 to 1997: A Global Report.Stockholm: International IDEA..1987. ‘Political institutions and voter turnout in the industrial democracies.’American Political Science Review, 81: 405-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/19619591991. ‘Postmaterialism, cognitive mobilization and public support for European integration.’British Journal of Political Science, 21: 443-68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0007123400006256.1994. ‘The gender gap in comparative perspective.’European Journal of Political Research, 25: 171-86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.1994.tb00416.x, and .Jenkins of Hillhead, Lord. Chmn. 1998. The Report of the Independent Commission on the Voting System.London: The Stationery Office, Cm 4090.1987. Mrs Thatcher's Revolution: The Ending of the Socialist Era.London: Jonathan Cape..1995. ‘The impact of spending on party constituency campaigns at recent British general elections.’Party Politics, 1: 261-73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1354068895001002005and .1996. ‘The strength of party identification among the British electorate: an exploration.’Electoral Studies, 15: 295-310. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0261-3794%2895%2900043-7and .1997a. ‘Fluctuating party identification in Britain: patterns revealed by four years of longitudinal study’.Politics, 17: 67-77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ponl.1997.17.issue-2and .1997b. ‘Anchors a-weigh: variations in strength of party identification and in socio-political attitudes among the British electorate, 1991-4.’ In British Elections and Parties Review, ed. CharlesPattie, DavidDenver, JustinFisher and StevenLudlam. London: Frank Cass.and .1988. A Nation Dividing? The Electoral Map of Great Britain 1979-87. Harlow: Longman., and .1997. Campaign 1997: How the General Election Was Won and Lost.London: Indigo..1994. How Parties Organize: Change and Adaptation in Party Organizations in Western Democracies.London: Sage Publications. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446250570and .1995. ‘Changing models of party organisation and party democracy: the emergence of the cartel party.’Party Politics, 1: 5-28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1354068895001001001and .et al.1992. ‘The membership of parties in European democracies, 1960-1990.’European Journal of Political Research, 22: 329-45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ejpr.1992.22.issue-3,1997‘The Labour campaign.’ In Britain Votes 1997, eds. PippaNorris and NeilGavin. Oxford: Oxford University Press..1994. Consensus Politics From Attlee to Major.[Page 292]Oxford: Blackwella.and .Kavanagh, Dennis and AnthonySeldon. Eds. 1994. The Major Effect.London: Macmillan.1997. ‘Why the Tories were trounced.’ In Britain Votes 1997, eds. PippaNorris and NeilGavin. Oxford: Oxford University Press..1955. ‘A theory of critical elections.’The Journal of Politics, 17: 3-18. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/21264011959. ‘Secular realignment and the party system.’The Journal of Politics, 21 (2): 198-210. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/21271621992. ‘Men and women at work and at home.’ In British Social Attitudes: The 9th Report, eds. RogerJowellet al.Aldershot: Dartmouth/SCPR..1992. ‘The implications of one party government.’ In Britain at the Polls, 1992, ed. AnthonyKing. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House..1997a. ‘Why Labour won – at last.’ In New Labour Triumphs: Britain at the Polls, ed. AnthonyKing. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House Publishers..King, Anthony. Ed. 1997b. New Labour Triumphs: Britain at the Polls.Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.1973. The Fall of Lloyd George: The Political Crisis of 1922.London: Macmillan..1966. ‘The transformation of the western European party systems.’ In Political Parties and Political Development, eds. JosephLaPalombara and MyronWeiner. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press..1994. The Transformation of European Social Democracy.New York: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511622014.1995. The Radical Right in Western Europe.Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press..1994. Parties, Policies and Democracy.Boulder, CO: Westview Press., and .1992. ‘Recasting social democracy in Europe: A nested games explanation of strategic adjustment in political parties.’Politics and Society, 20: 51-70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0032329292020001004.1982. The Battle for the Labour Party.London: Kogan Pageand .1993. ‘Approaches to the state: alternative conceptions and historical dynamics.’Comparative Politics, 16 (2): 223-46. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/421608.1966: Political Parties.Princeton, NJ: Princeton Universityand .Laver, Michael and IanBudge. Eds. 1992. Party Policy and Government Coalitions.London: Macmillan.1978. ‘Race, electoral strategy and the major parties.’Parliamentary Affairs, 21: 274-5..1985. ‘The electoral participation of Black and Asian Britons.’Parliamentary Affairs, 38: 307-18.and .1998. ‘Ethnic minority participation and representation in the British electoral system.’ In Race and British Electoral Politics, ed. ShamitSaggar. London: UCL Press..Lee, D.J. and B.S.Turner. Eds. 1996. Conflicts about Class: Debating Inequality in Late Industrialism. London: Longman.1997. Sleaze: The Corruption of Parliament.London: Fourth Estate.and .1970. Europe's Would-be Polity: Patterns of Change in the European Community.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.and .1960. Political Man: The Social Bases of Politics.Garden City, NY: Doubleday.1981. Political Man.. [Page 293]2nd edn.Garden City, NY: Doubleday.Lipset, Seymour Martin and SteinRokkan. Eds. 1967a. Party Systems and Voter Alignments: Cross-national Perspectives.London: Collier-Macmillan.1967b. ‘Cleavage systems, party systems and voter alignments: an introduction.’ In Party Systems and Voter Alignments, eds. Seymour MartinLipset and SteinRokkan. New York: Free Press.and .1997. ‘Gender politics.’ In Britain Votes 1997, eds. PippaNorris and NeilGavin. Oxford: Oxford University Press..Lovenduski, Joni and PippaNorris. Eds. 1993. Gender and Party Politics.London: Sage Publications.Lovenduski, Joni and PippaNorris. Eds. 1996. Women in Politics.Oxford: Oxford University Press.1994. ‘The party and women.’ In Conservative Century, eds. AnthonySeldon and StuartBall. Oxford: Oxford University Press., and .1995. ‘On the bias and variance of samples of individuals: a comparison of the electoral registers and postcode address file as sampling frames.’The Statistician, 44: 173-94. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2348443and .1998. ‘Stuff that envelope, say the activists.’Guardian, 23 June: 17..1997. Party System Change.Oxford: Oxford University Press..1996. The Blair Revolution: Can New Labour Deliver?London: Faber & Faber.and .1998. ‘The gender gap in US presidential elections: when? why? implications?’American Journal of Sociology, 103 (5): 1235-66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/ajs.1998.103.issue-5and .1995. ‘Class voting in capitalist democracies since WWII.’Annual Review of Sociology, 21: 137-63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.21.080195.001033, and .Margetts, Helen and GarethSmyth. Eds. 1994. Turning Japanese? Britain with a Permanent Party of Government.London: Lawrence & Wishart.1993. ‘The use of CAPI for attitude surveys: an experimental comparison with traditional methods.’Journal of Official Statistics, 9: 641-61., and .1961. Capital.Moscow: Foreign Language Publishing House..1973. ‘Opinion structure of political parties: the special law of curvilinear disparity.’Political Studies, 21: 135-51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/post.1973.21.issue-21995. ‘Measuring levels of party identification: does question order matter?’Public Opinion Quarterly, 59: 259-68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/269472and .1947. The British General Election of 1945.London: G. Cumberlege.and .1974. The Evolution of the Labour Party 1910-1924.Oxford: Oxford University Press.1970. ‘The rise and fall of the Scottish National Party.’Political Studies, 18: 367-72http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/post.1970.18.issue-3.1924. Non-voting: Causes and Methods of Control.Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.and .1989. Race and Party Competition.Oxford: Clarendon Press..1998. ‘Ethnic minorities and the British party system in the 1990s and beyond.’ In Race and British Electoral Politics, ed. ShamitSaggar. London: UCL Press..1996. The Changing American Voter.Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.and .1977. Electoral Dynamics in Britain Since 1918.London: Macmillan.1986. ‘Partisanship and party preference in government and opposition: the mid-term perspective.’Electoral Studies, 5: 31-46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0261-3794%2886%2990027-2, and . [Page 294]1994. ‘Who dominates whom?’Sociological Review, 42: 639-63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/sore.1994.42.issue-4.1995. Election ‘45.London: Fabian Society..1979. The Lloyd George Coalition Government 1918-22.Oxford: Oxford University Press..1997. ‘Asian voting: preliminary results.’ (Unpublished briefing notes.).1998. British Public Opinion, XXI (March)..Mueller, Carol. Ed. 1988. ed. The Politics of the Gender Gap.London: Sage.1995. ‘The concept of critical realignment, electoral behavior, and political change.’American Political Science Review, 89 (1): 10-22. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/20830711996). ‘Decline of electoral turnout: the case of Norway.’European Journal of Political Research, 29: 235-56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ejpr.1996.29.issue-2and . (1976. The Changing American Voter.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press., and .1995. ‘Trends and contrasts.’ In Public Opinion and Internationalized Governance, eds. OskarNiedermayer and RichardSinnott. Oxford: Oxford University Press..1985. ‘The gender gap in America and Britain.’Parliamentary Affairs, 38: 192-201..1986. ‘Conservative attitudes in recent British elections: an emerging gender gap?’Political Studies, 34: 120-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/post.1986.34.issue-1.1988. ‘The gender gap: a cross national trend?’ In The Politics of the Gender Gap, ed. CarolMueller. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage..1990. British By-elections.Oxford: Clarendon..1993. ‘The gender-generation gap in British Elections.’ In British Elections and Parties Yearbook 1993, eds. DavidDenver, PippaNorris, DavidBroughton, ColinRailings. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf..1994. ‘Labour Party factionalism and extremism.’ In Labour's Last Chance? eds. AnthonyHeath, RogerJowell and JohnCurtice. Aldershot: Dartmouth..1995. ‘May's law of curvilinear disparity revisited: leaders, officers, members and voters in British political parties.’Party Politics, 1: 29-47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1354068895001001002.1996a. ‘Gender realignment in comparative perspective.’ In The Paradox of Parties, ed. MarianSimms. Melbourne: Allen & Unwin..1996b. ‘Mobilising the women's vote: the gender-generation gap in voting behaviour.’Parliamentary Affairs, 49 (1): 333-42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.pa.a028683.1996c. Electoral Change Since 1945.Oxford: Blackwell..1997a. Electoral Change in Britain Since 1945.Oxford: Blackwell..1997b. ‘The battle for the campaign agenda.’ In New Labour Triumphs: Britain at the Polls, ed. AnthonyKing. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House..1997c. ‘Anatomy of a Labour landslide.’ In Britain Votes, 1997, eds. PippaNorris and NeilGavin. Oxford: Oxford University Press..1998. ‘Political elites and constitutional change: principles or interests?’ In Understanding Constitutional Change: Special Issue of Scottish Affairs.Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh..1999. Critical Citizens: Global Support for Democratic Government.Oxford: Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/0198295685.001.0001.1999. On Message: Communicating the Campaign.London: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446218587, , , and .1997. Britain Votes 1997.Oxford: Oxford University Press.and .1995. Political Recruitment: Gender, Race and Class in the British Parliament.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.and .1997. ‘The Conservative Party.’ In New Labour Triumphs: Britain at the Polls, ed. AnthonyKing. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House..1995. ‘Gender gaps in Nordic voting behaviour.’ In Women in [Page 295]Nordic Politics, eds. LauriKarvonen and PerSelle. Aldershot: Dartmouth..1997. ‘Higher education qualifications.’ In Ethnicity in the 1991 Census, Volume 4, ed. ValerieKarn. London: HMSO., and .1992. The Rational Public.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.and .1988. Political Parties: Organization and Power.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press..Paterson, Lindsay. Ed. 1998. A Diverse Assembly: The Debate on a Scottish Parliament.Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.1998. ‘Voter turnout at the British general election of 1992: rational choice, social standing or political efficacy?’European Journal of Political Research, 33: 263-83.and .1997. ‘Women in the campaign and in the Commons.’ In Labour's Landslide, eds. AndrewGeddes and JonathanTonge. Manchester: Manchester University Press..1967. Social Geography of British Elections, 1885-1910.London: Macmillan..1996. ‘Women and change in the Labour Party 1979-1995.’ In Women in Politics, eds. JoniLovenduski and PippaNorris. Oxford: Oxford University Press..1992. Harold Wilson.London: HarperCollins..1997. ‘New Labour, new era?’Political Quarterly, 68 (4): 325-34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/poqu.1997.68.issue-4.1998. ‘Conservative Party Membership.’ Paper presented at the EPOP annual conference, University of Essex, 27 September..1988. Why Americans Don't Vote.New York: Pantheon Books.and .1983. ‘The marriage gap?’Public Opinion, 6..1986. ‘American voter turnout in comparative perspective.’American Political Science Review80: 17-44. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1957082Jr.1985. Capitalism and Social Democracy.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press..1986. Paper Stones: A History of Electoral Socialism.Chicago. IL: University of Chicago Press.and .1967. Political Representation and Elections in Britain.London: Allen & Unwin.1992. Southern Discomfort. Fabian Society Pamphlet 555. London: Fabian Society..1997. Local Elections in Britain.London: Routledge. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203412756and .1997. ‘What kind of vision is that? British public attitudes towards the European Community during the Thatcher era.’British Journal of Political Science, 27: 111-18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0007123497210057.1997. ‘Race, ethnicity and housing differentials in Britain.’ In Ethnicity in the 1991 Census, Volume 4, ed. ValerieKarn. London: HMSO..1980. ‘Nine second-order national elections.’European Journal of Political Research8: 3-45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ejpr.1980.8.issue-1and .1995. Tony Blair.London: Little Brown..1967. Race, Community and Conflict: A Study of Sparkbrook.Oxford: Oxford University Press.and .1998. ‘Ethnic politics and the Conservatives in the post-Thatcher era.’ In Race and British Electoral Politics, ed. ShamitSaggar. London: UCL Press..1995. Sleaze: Politicians, Private Interests and Public Reactions.Oxford: Oxford University Press.and .1992. Gender, Consciousness and Politics.London: Routledge.[Page 296]1976. A Theory of Party Competition.London: Wiley..1988. ‘The new Indian middle class in Britain.’Ethnic and Racial Studies, 11 (4): 456-73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01419870.1988.9993615.1990. ‘Roots to mobility: the social mobility of Britain's black population 1971-87.’Ethnic and Racial Studies, 13: 274-86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01419870.1990.9993672.1973. The Nature of Human Values.New York: Free Press.1970. Citizens, Elections, Parties. Approaches to the Comparative Study of the Processes of Development.Oslo: Universitetsforlaget..1974. Electoral Behavior: A Comparative Handbook.New York: Free Press..1997. ‘The new Labour government: on the crest of a wave.’Parliamentary Affairs, 50(4). http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.pa.a028769.1986. Voters Begin to Choose: From Closed Class to Open Elections in Britain.London: Sage.and .1990. The Loyalties of Voters.London: Sage.and .1955. Elections and Electors: Studies in Democratic Representation.London: Eyre & Spottiswoode.1991. ‘Sociological and psychological predictors of voting in Great Britain.’Journal of Social Psychology, 131: 647-54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1991.9924648and .1997a. ‘Racial politics.’Parliamentary Affairs, 50: 693-707. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.pa.a028765.1997b. ‘The dog that did not bite.’ In Labour's Landslide, eds. AndrewGeddes and JohnTonge. Manchester: Manchester University Press..1998a. ‘Race and voting: some conceptual and theoretical concerns.’ In Race and British Electoral Politics, ed. ShamitSaggar. London: UCL Press..1998b. ‘Piecing together the puzzle.’ In Race and British Electoral Politics, ed. ShamitSaggar. London: UCL Press..1998c. ‘A late, though not lost, opportunity: ethnic minority electors, party strategy and the Conservative Party.’The Political Quarterly, 69: 148-59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/poqu.1998.69.issue-2.‘Smoking guns and magic bullets: The “race card” debate revisited in 1997.’Immigrants and Minorities.. Forthcoming.1996. ‘Economic performance, management competence and the outcome of the next general election.’Political Studies, 44: 203-31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/post.1996.44.issue-2.1997a. ‘The new electoral battleground.’ In New Labour Triumphs: Britain at the Polls, ed. AnthonyKing. London: Chatham House..1997b. ‘Voting and the electorate.’ In Developments in British Politics 5, eds. PatrickDunleavy, AndrewGamble, IanHolliday and GillianPeele. London: Macmillan..1999. ‘The dynamics of party preference change in Britain, 1991-96.’Political Studies, forthcoming.and .1983. Decade of Dealignment: The Conservative Victory of 1979 and Electoral Trends in the 1970s.London: Cambridge University Press.and .1969. ‘From the sociology of politics to political sociology.’ In Politics and the Social Sciences, ed. Seymour MartinLipset. Oxford: Oxford University Press..1990. A Nation of Home Owners?London: Unwin Hyman.1995. Designer Politics: How Elections are Won.London: Macmillan..1984. Ideology and Voting Behaviour: An Exploratory Study.Oxford, Clarendon Press..1996. Parties and their Members: Organizing for Victory in Britain and Germany.Oxford: Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/0198279183.001.0001.1981. ‘A multivariate explanation of decreasing turnout in presidential elections, 1960-1976.’American Journal of Political Science, 25: [Page 297]68-95. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/21109131995. ‘Political parties in decline?’ In Citizens and the State, eds. Hans-DieterKlingemann and DieterFuchs. Oxford: Oxford University Press.and .1992. ‘The decline of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party: religion, ideology or economics?’Contemporary Record, 9 (2): 319-42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13619469508581341and .1994. Conservative Century: The Conservative Party Since 1900.Oxford: Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198202387.001.0001and .1997. Sex as a Political Variable.Boulder, CO: Lynne Reinner., and .1992. ‘Labour: the great transformation.’ In Britain at the Polls 1992, ed. AnthonyKing. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House Publishers..1997. ‘Tony Blair and New Labour.’ In New Labour Triumphs: Britain at the Polls, ed. AnthonyKing. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House..1992. Labour's Grassroots.Oxford: Clarendon Paperbacks.and .1991. The End of Realignment?: Interpreting American Electoral Eras.Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.1994. The Labour Party Since 1979: Crisis and Transformation.London: Routledge..1996. The Labour Party Since 1945.Oxford: Blackwell..1996. ‘Women and the Labour Party.’ In Women in Politics, eds. JoniLovenduski and PippaNorris. Oxford: Oxford University Press..Smith, Martin and JoanneSpear. Eds. 1992. The Changing Labour Party.London: Routledge.1991. Can the Tories Lose?London: Lawrence & Wishart..1995. Tony Blair: The Moderniser.London: Bantam..1996. ‘The Conservative Party and European integration 1989-95.’Party Politics, 2: 77-97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1354068896002001004.1980. Baldwin Thwarts the Opposition: The British General Election of 1935.London: Croom Helm..1991. Public Opinion in America: Moods, Cycles and Swings.Boulder CO: Westview..1995. ‘Dynamic representation.’American Political Science Review, 89 (3): 543-65. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2082973, and .1966. ‘Spatial models of party competition.’ In Elections and the Political Order, eds. AngusCampbellet al.New York: Wiley..1968. ‘Parties and the nationalization of electoral forces.’ In The American Party Systems, eds. WilliamChambers and Walter DeanBurnham. New York: Oxford University Press..1986. ‘Non-white policy preferences, political participation and the political agenda in Britain.’ In Race, Government and Politics in Britain, eds. ZigLayton-Henry and PaulRich. London: Macmillan..1992. ‘A changing political agenda? The structure of political attitudes in Britain, 1974-87’, International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 4: 148-76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/4.2.148and .1998. ‘Explaining the gender gap in voting: a cross-national analysis.’Social Science Quarterly, 79., and .1973. Dynamics of the Party System: Alignment and Realignment of Political Parties in the United States.Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.1998. ‘The Scottish electorate and the Scottish Parliament.’ In Understanding Constitutional Change: Special Issue of Scottish Affairs.Edinburgh: University [Page 298] of Edinburgh., , and .1989. ‘Official and reported turnout in the British general election of 1987.’British Journal of Political Science, 19: 537-70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0007123400005627and .1997. The Rise and Fall of Liberalism, 1776-1988.London: Longman..1996. ‘The British Election Panel Study 1992-95: response characteristics and attrition.’CREST Working Paper40., and .1992. The Disappearing American Voter.Washington, DC: The Brookings Institute.1976. ‘Party identification as a cross-national concept: its meaning in The Netherlands.’ In Party Identification and Beyond, eds. IanBudgeet al.London: Wiley..1987. Danish Elections 1920-79: A Logit Approach to Ecological Analysis and Inference.Aarhus: Politica..1995. ‘Working mothers: choice or circumstance?’ In British Social Attitudes: The 12th Report, eds. RogerJowellet al.Aldershot: Dartmouth/SCPR..et al.1999. British Election Studies 1997. Technical Report.London: SCPR.1991. The British General Election of 1931.Oxford: Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198202189.001.0001.1937. Political Behavior: Studies in Election Statistics.London: P.S. King.1994. ‘Party manifestos.’ In Labour's Last Chance? The 1992 Election and Beyond, eds. AnthonyHeathet al.Aldershot: Dartmouth..1992. British Politics and the Great War: Coalition and Conflict 1915-1918.New Haven, CT: Yale University Press..1996. Choosing Europe?: The European Electorate and National Politics in the Face of Union.Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.and .1972. Participation in America.New York: Harper & Row.and .1966. The Formation of the Liberal Party 1857-1868.London: Constable.1983. Crosses on the Ballot: Patterns of British Voter Alignment since 1885.Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.1996. Political Parties and Party Systems.Oxford: Oxford University Press..1996. The Decline of American Political Parties 1952-1994.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.1991. ‘The two lefts? Occupation and party choice in France, Italy, and The Netherlands.’American Journal of Sociology, 96: 1327-61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/ajs.1991.96.issue-6.1999. ‘The secret life of class voting: Britain, France, and the United States since the 1930s.’ In The End of Class Politics? Class Voting in Comparative Context, ed. GeoffreyEvans. Oxford: Oxford University Press.and .1994. ‘Party organizational change in Britain: the iron law of centralization?’ in R. S.Katz and P.Mair (eds.) How Parties Organize. London: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446250570.1985. ‘The impact of race on political behaviour in Britain.’British Journal of Political Science, 15.and .1979. ‘Strategies for party organization and voter mobilization: Britain, Norway and Argentina.’Comparative Political Studies, 12: 169-204..Werbner, Pnina and MohammedAnwar. Eds. 1991. Black and Ethnic Leaderships: The Cultural Dimensions of Political Action.London: Routledge.[Page 299]1998. ‘New Labour – New Grass-Roots Party?’ Paper presented at the PSA annual conference, University of Keele.and .1994. True Blues.Oxford: Oxford University Press., and .1996. ‘Heightening comparativists’ concern for model choice – voting behaviour in Great Britain and The Netherlands.’American Journal of Political Science, 40: 231-60. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2111701and .1995. ‘Anticipating social democracy, pre-empting social democracy.’Politics and Society, 23: 465-94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0032329295023004004.1995. ‘Party membership and party representativeness.’ In Citizens and the State, eds. Hans-DieterKlingemann and DieterFuchs. Oxford: Oxford University Press..1994. ‘Racism in Europe: unity and diversity.’ In Racism, Modernity and Identity on the Western Front, eds. AliRattansi and SallyWestwood. Oxford: Polity Press..1992. National Crisis and National Government: British Politics, the Economy and Empire 1926-1932.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press..1995. ‘The public as thermostat.’American Journal of Political Science, 39 (4): 981-1000. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2111666.1996. ‘Dynamics of representation: the case of US spending on defence.’British Journal of Political Science, 26 (1): 81-104. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0007123400007420.